Letter: 40B shouldn't be a Norwood issue

Saturday

Jun 14, 2014 at 2:00 PM

TO THE EDITOR:The Plimpton Press Overlay District(PPOD)/Chapter 40R development was too large and dense as proposed.I am in favor of smart growth that is sustainable and beneficial for our town – not one that would strain our services/infrastructure, increase our population quickly (remember hundreds of apartments coming to Upland Woods) and would include 10,000 sq. feet of competitive retail space against a Norwood Center that is already struggling for survival. To sweeten the affirmative vote potential, some affordable units were added to the mix of this development.Instead of hearing creative solutions- there are many- from our elected officials as to how we can reach 40B compliance, I heard nothing but negatives and excuses. Town Meeting members were stuck between a rock and a hard place, urged – almost as a scare tactic, to vote the PPOD as a partial solution to attaining compliance. Really?How many members voted in favor of the PPOD because they thought it was truly a "smart" idea for Norwood? Or was it the fear factor card the town dealt that made them vote for it? Did statements such as, "we don’t want history to repeat itself with more chapter 40B developments" work on you?The only history repeating itself here is the lack of constructive, proactive leadership in the area of affordable housing and chapter 40B compliance.Norwood should have already been safe using the criteria where 1.5 percent of our developable land is used for affordable housing. I hold our officials accountable for their recalcitrant attitude towards dealing with 40B compliance. Chapter 40B is 45 years old. Either Norwood doesn’t want to comply, doesn’t know how to comply; doesn’t care if they comply. What is it?Pay attention. The Norwood landscape can change quickly while you sleep.I’m disgusted!Toni EoscoDistrict 5 TM Representative